On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 8:07 AM, Changli Gao <xiaosuo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 12:28 AM, Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Saturday 2010-07-24 13:47, Changli Gao wrote: >> >>>On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 4:55 PM, Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> On Saturday 2010-07-24 06:29, Changli Gao wrote: >>>> >>>>>update libxt_length to revision 1 to support ipv6 jumbo frames. >>>> >>>> You can't just go and change these things, would break xt_length v0. >>>> >>> >>>Hmm. I have updated the patch(attached), but the v0 handlers are not >>>called. Is there anything I missed? Or Is there a bug in iptables? >> >> Probably because you are still breaking the compatibility by editing >> struct xt_length_info. > > I am sure it isn't the problem. The kernel module can work with the > old iptables binary. However after I committed the rules with the > revision 1, I can't get the correct output with the command > 'iptables-save' or 'iptables -nvL'. Sorry. I made a mistake. I committed the rules(revision 0) with the old iptables, but I could not get the correct output with the new iptables or iptables-save. > I checked the code of iptables, > and found it doesn't check the revision when founding matches and > targets, and even the kernel seems doesn't transfer the revision info > to user space. > >> I'd say let's concentrate on rev 2 that I >> submitted. >> > > I have seen it. Thanks. > > -- > Regards, > Changli Gao(xiaosuo@xxxxxxxxx) > -- Regards, Changli Gao(xiaosuo@xxxxxxxxx) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
